GLOMAC ALLIANCE SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT : 433582--H) AFFIN BANK BERHAD (NO. SYARIKAT : 25058-T)

GLOMAC ALLIANCE SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT : 433582--H) AFFIN BANK BERHAD (NO. SYARIKAT : 25058-T)

The High Court held that the plaintiff's statement of claim discloses triable issues related to alleged wrongful conversion/unauthorised change and sale of land and proprietary rights arising from loan security; the matter was not a plain and obvious case for summary disposal under Order 18 r.19, therefore the Magistrate's refusal to strike out the claim was correct and the appeal was dismissed with costs.

Citation
WA-11ANCVC-71-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Glomac Alliance Sdn. Bhd.; Respondent/plaintiff: Affin Bank Berhad
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
7 April 2021
Case Number
WA-11ANCVC-71-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal Against Magistrate Decision Under Order 18 R.19 (strike Out) of the Rules (high Court Judgment)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court affirms Magistrate decision
Legal Topics
Wrongful Conversion of Land, Recovery of Land, Locus Standi, Estoppel, Laches, Striking Out Under Order 18 R.19, Settlement Agreement, Mortgage/charge
Source Language
Malay/English
Property Law Civil Procedure Contract Law Equity Wrongful Conversion of Land Recovery of Land Locus Standi Estoppel +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glomac Alliance Sdn. Bhd.

Appellant/defendant

Affin Bank Berhad

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal Against Magistrate Decision Under Order 18 R.19 (strike Out) of the Rules (high Court Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff has locus standi/standing to sue
  2. 2 Whether the claim discloses a cause of action in wrongful conversion of immovable property
  3. 3 Whether the Magistrate had jurisdiction to hear the claim

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held that the plaintiff's statement of claim discloses triable issues related to alleged wrongful conversion/unauthorised change and sale of land and proprietary rights arising from loan security; the matter was not a plain and obvious case for summary disposal under Order 18 r.19, therefore the Magistrate's refusal to strike out the claim was correct and the appeal was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court affirms Magistrate decision

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Costs of RM3,000 awarded to respondent payable by appellant, subject to fi alokatur.